Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Can someone expolain what's so great about HTML (Score 4, Interesting) 131

by ShieldW0lf (#48408677) Attached to: HTML5: It's Already Everywhere, Even In Mobile

It's less secure than its predecessors, allowing you to do more with it than you could before.

That sounds like a troll, but it's not. A lot of what's billed as innovation in this sphere was thought of by many people before, but the platform was intentionally designed to make it impossible for security reasons.

Comment: This isn't a secret (Score 2) 122

by ShieldW0lf (#48408655) Attached to: Electric Shock Study Suggests We'd Rather Hurt Ourselves Than Others

1) Compose your team entirely of specialists who are focused on one small piece of the puzzle
2) Find a psychopath who will make ethical compromises in the name of efficiency that well adjusted people would consider morally reprehensible to coordinate your team
3) Keep your team from seeing the big picture so they don't revolt
4) Keep outsiders from realizing how your efficiency is achieved so they don't shun you
5) Profit!

You get bonus points for setting all this up, making yourself the recipient of the inevitable rewards, keeping yourself ignorant of the particulars and sleeping like a baby.

Comment: Re:But but but (Score 1) 55

by ShieldW0lf (#48382205) Attached to: HYREL 3-D Printers Were Developed by 3-D Printer Users (Video)

Stratasys have been making reliable rapid prototyping machines for many years, and that making another one isn't a noteworthy achievement.

The compelling thing about 3D printing is that there are open source, non patent encumbered implementations available.

Making an open source non patent encumbered 3D printer that is significantly more reliable would be newsworthy. This isn't.

Comment: Re:The answer (Score 1) 441

by ShieldW0lf (#48331053) Attached to: The Other Side of Diversity In Tech

This does a great job of illustrating the advantage of "diversity", which ISN'T having people approach the problem from different perspectives.

Hand in hand with "diversity" is "inclusiveness", and "inclusiveness" is the real point.

If you have a town full of people that rely on "the town farmer" to grow the food, and they have this naive idea that food is something that grows on a supermarket shelf, they're going to govern themselves like idiots any time they're given a voice in how to handle the food supply.

This means that they'd be better off not to participate in a democracy and just make this guy their master because food is so important that they'll kill themselves if they make a mistake, which their ignorance practically guarantees.

So, for the sake of their own security, they need to be included.


They're ignorant as little babies. Their ideas are founded on nothing at all. There's a system that is providing for their food supply, and their purpose there is to learn it, not assert control over it.

They are there to become grounded in reality, and to surrender to reality, and to be absorbed into what is there.

Coming into a situation with the attitude that you are there to bring something to the table and that your perspective deserves to be respected is demanding that reality be ignored in favor of making you feel comfortable and valued.

So, instead of learning to not rely on the farmer, you basically fire him in a fit of ego and then starve to death when you realize you don't know what the hell you're doing.

A lot of people miss the point on this, and they're running around with this idealistic position that they are doing a good thing by "transforming" cultures to make them more "diverse", and shoving arrogant ignoramuses into positions of authority and demanding that the people whose culture was formed around a set of problems abandon all of their hard won lessons and start playing politics as the systems that are their duty go to shit.

Comment: Re:Can we stop trying to come up with a reason? (Score -1, Troll) 786

by ShieldW0lf (#48198699) Attached to: NPR: '80s Ads Are Responsible For the Lack of Women Coders

Men and women both contribute to creating people.

A mans contribution can be completed in a single night.

A womans contribution requires 9 months, during which time any distraction, disruption or stress can cause the "person creation" process to fail catastrophically.

This is the reason we systematically transform men into specialists instead of men. It is a waste of precious resources to turn a woman into a computer programmer when she's a lot more valuable as a mother.

It's not that women are incapable of being computer programmers. It's that they have more important duties, and when they neglect those duties, the entire human race suffers for it.

At the end of the day, the problem is people like you, who don't care about the fate of the human race as long as you get what you want out of life before you die, and, frankly, the solution is NOT diplomatic in nature.

Comment: Re:Lenovo phones (Score 1) 73

by ShieldW0lf (#48192023) Attached to: Rumor: Lenovo In Talks To Buy BlackBerry

People do get that the only thing that knocked RIM from the top of the heap was the lawsuit filed by patent troll NTP, right?

They weren't beaten on technical merits. They weren't beaten because they "don't understand consumers". They weren't beaten on style, or execution, or anything else.

They were beaten by a corrupt US legal system that forced the guys running the company to stop running the company, hang around in a court room for years and in the end pay over half a trillion dollars to patent trolls.

Looking back, what they should have done was shut down US operations immediately, allowed the US government to implode and gone on to greener pastures.

Moral of the story, don't do business with Americans. One way or another, they'll fuck you over in the end. That's how they got where they are today.

Smart men just don't do business with the sharpest horse trader in town.

Comment: Re: Read below to see what Bennett has to say. (Score 0) 622

by ShieldW0lf (#48143697) Attached to: The Correct Response To Photo Hack Victim-Blamers

I do not agree that this is a good use of public resources, part of which are mine. That's the point of having a discussion about it.

If she wants to hire a private investigator out of her own pocket, that's all well and good.

That's the thing about a democracy... it's not based on principles, it's based on unity. If you can't convince the vast number of people who agree with me, you have no right to use our tax money to finance your investigation.

I remember when SnapChat first hit the scene, thinking that such a service shouldn't exist, that it's inherently malignant in nature. Seeing these people get burned by its failure makes me happy, and I have no interest in working extra hours so I can fund a team of people to shore up what was a bad idea in the first place.

Perhaps, if you hope to see your vision of how things ought to be realized, you should stop making authoritative statements and start providing compelling arguments that take my demographics interests into account.

God may be subtle, but he isn't plain mean. -- Albert Einstein